A few items in the APG are for specific classes, or even people with specific classes that made specific decisions. For example, Knight's Pennon is very useful for cavaliers due to working as a Banner as well. Or the Helm of the Fearsome Mien, the Horn of the Huntmaster, the Vest of the Cockroach, etc. One of the Top 32 entries last year specifically modified Dirge of Doom too.
What about items that explicitly work better for specific archetypes? Let's say a fedora that, as well as helping anyone who wears it, augments the Stranger's Fortune ability of the Mysterious Stranger.
What about items that explicitly work better for specific archetypes? Let's say a fedora that, as well as helping anyone who wears it, augments the Stranger's Fortune ability of the Mysterious Stranger.
Offhand, archetypes strike me as being way too specific to be workable as a requirement for a magic item. Consider: you've got at least five times as many archetypes as you have base classes; half the time nobody uses any of them; and you have to choose the "right" archetype when you take your first level in that class. Archetypes are a nice way to customize your characters, but I wouldn't tailor an item to them any more than I'd make an item which is particularly useful for a particular combination of feats and skill abilities. If it's only useful if you build your character just _so_, then I'm afraid it's probably not Superstar.
That's my assumption as well, but I had an item that could fit in the augmentation of an archetype's ability quite well. I figured it couldn't hurt to ask.
Not to add insult to injury, but even without Construction requirements, there's always a chance that your item was so good, the judges might have forgiven you the slight and let it through. But by advertising your mistake, you've shattered anonymity, and even if your item is the best item in the history of items, there's nothing they can do for you now.
"This person broke anonymity because they said they just submitted" isn't really an issue, because we have better things to do than to cross-check the timestamps on posts and submissions. Especially as "I just posted" could be anywhere from 1 minute to 1 hour ago, and odds are we'd have multiple submissions during that time period.
Contrariwise, "I just submitted my item about crystallized alien grubs" does break anonymity.
Double-contrariwise, "I didn't include the construction section" isn't going to disqualify you because of an anonymity issue. Instead, your item is probably going to just be rejected because you'd have to have the Best Item We've Ever Seen to make us overlook that sort of omission.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
I really wouldn't try to pigeon-hole too much.
My item last year was an evil item for worshipers of Asmodeus that impacted an opponent's ability to channel positive energy. Among the other issues that caused it to be rejected, a judge commented that they liked the idea of how it affected channel energy, but would have liked the mechanic more if it wasn't so restrictive.
I think it makes sense to play off a specific mechanic, like bloodlines, haunts, ki, hexes, or whatever. But to limit it further to just one archetype is a bad idea.
Ryan, for one, frequently looks at the game from a brand and marketing perspective, and he really likes to see inclusive items. There was a sidebar in the RPG Superstar podcast (which you should listen to if you haven't), about how the corset idea might exclude an entire gender and how to work around that. So to be sure, the judges are thinking about inclusiveness in items.
Be really careful about making your item too narrowly focused. Something that you find in a treasure trove should be usable to someone in the party. Otherwise, it's just something you take to town to sell. And that's not superstar.
I'm going to rescind my question. I'm fairly certain it would've made the GM's job harder.
Thanks for helping Seth and Standback.
There seem to be a lot more people flirting with the anonymity line this year, telling us exact moments they submit or other details. Or maybe that's just my imagination.
What Sean said. We really don't cross-reference board posts. Case in point, I've been in the forums today (Jan 4th) reading and grading items and I just found this post from Dec. 18th :)
There seem to be a lot more people flirting with the anonymity line this year, telling us exact moments they submit or other details. Or maybe that's just my imagination.What Sean said. We really don't cross-reference board posts. Case in point, I've been in the forums today (Jan 4th) reading and grading items and I just found this post from Dec. 18th :)
What, like you guys have other stuff to do with your time than cross-referencing items with posts?
Kidding, of course. You folks do an amazing job, giving your time to this contest. Let me add my voice to the multitude in saying, "Thanks."
And another question: At what point does a wondrous item become a rod? When it's primarily used by holding it like a scepter?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Usually when the requirements section says Craft Rod, that's a good tip off :)
Or, like on an entry I just autorejected, when the requirements section reads: "Construction: NON-Applicable (Greater Artifact)" you know the entry just might be in trouble. Oops.
Or, like on an entry I just autorejected, when the requirements section reads: "Construction: NON-Applicable (Greater Artifact)" you know the entry just might be in trouble. Oops.
By the way, even though I rejected this item I have to admit I presumed it may be from one of our younger Paizonians and as a result I did it with sensitivity and encouragement should they ever request feedback.
I remember when I was 10 I sent a letter to TSR about something silly and overpowered like a +6 sword or +10 armor or something. I'll never forget the kind letter I got back (dont remember from who, but someone big) being supportive of me playing D&D and having fun but gently redirecting me to something more rules appropriate. They didnt make me feel bad or stupid, and that meant a lot to me and said a lot about them. They could easily have said "get out of here you idiot kid, you're bothering me," but they didnt. So sometimes when we see an item that suggests perhaps a younger entrant, we say "rejected, but good try, review the rules, try again next year, keep playing and enjoying the game, good job even submitting."
So we arent alway mean :) (me anyway, Sean is always mean--wait, just kidding, Sean don't send ninjas after me)
Usually when the requirements section says Craft Rod, that's a good tip off :)
Hah! I think I'll play it on the safe side and not tempt the judges with "Well, this would be a great Rod..."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hah! I think I'll play it on the safe side and not tempt the judges with "Well, this would be a great Rod..."Usually when the requirements section says Craft Rod, that's a good tip off :)
I get that from the women I date a lot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So we arent alway mean :) (me anyway, Sean is always mean--wait, just kidding, Sean don't send ninjas after me)
I balance out my online meanness by being very pleasant in person. :)
Ninjas are so 4711.... Now pirates... thems are this years minions-of-choice... Argh.
Ninjas are so 4711.... Now pirates... thems are this years minions-of-choice... Argh.
Yes, but ninjas are elegant, painful, and leave nothing behind but the great smell of Brut!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I balance out my online meanness by being very pleasant in person. :)
OH MY GOD I HAVE TO COMMENT ON THIS!
That is so self-aware! Sean, that is the funnies, most true thing I have ever heard!
OK, guys, let me tell you, as gruff as Sean may be online and in posts (and he is), he is without doubt one of the coolest, nicest, most polite and friendly people you will ever meet. He is a great guy and always has a smile on his face and a good word to say to you when he sees you. The crazy dichotomy of his online persona and real life persona are so shockingly different I just have to comment on this. Seriously. This is so true! And posted by Sean himself! Awesome!
Well played, Mr. Reynolds... :)
I balance out my online meanness by being very pleasant in person. :)
Actually a prime example of brutal honesty :P
Which is why we like the contest, my last attempts go something like
2008 - What was I thinking
2009 - Dammit - SAIC
2010 - Ack - SAK
This year, I'm hoping for "You beat the abbreviations..."
But whatever, I know the answers will be honest and factual.
I have that thick skin (thicker than a Rhino now), and look forward to another year of feedback to improve.
So dont change at all, any of you Judges, you are all exactly what we need to spur us on to give you, one day, judging nirvana.
Aww, thanks, Clark!
Uh... I mean... you rat bastard!
Star Voter Season 6
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I balance out my online meanness by being very pleasant in person. :)OH MY GOD I HAVE TO COMMENT ON THIS!
That is so self-aware! Sean, that is the funnies, most true thing I have ever heard!
OK, guys, let me tell you, as gruff as Sean may be online and in posts (and he is), he is without doubt one of the coolest, nicest, most polite and friendly people you will ever meet. He is a great guy and always has a smile on his face and a good word to say to you when he sees you. The crazy dichotomy of his online persona and real life persona are so shockingly different I just have to comment on this. Seriously. This is so true! And posted by Sean himself! Awesome!
Well played, Mr. Reynolds... :)
Apparently, Sean has Clark's forum password... :)
Apparently, Sean has Clark's forum password... :)
No. That was me. ;-)
I balance out my online meanness by being very pleasant in person. :)Actually a prime example of brutal honesty :P
Which is why we like the contest, my last attempts go something like
2008 - What was I thinking
2009 - Dammit - SAIC
2010 - Ack - SAKThis year, I'm hoping for "You beat the abbreviations..."
But whatever, I know the answers will be honest and factual.
I have that thick skin (thicker than a Rhino now), and look forward to another year of feedback to improve.
So dont change at all, any of you Judges, you are all exactly what we need to spur us on to give you, one day, judging nirvana.
Yup, I'm with Anthony on this. This is my third year and looking back over my previous two entries with the judges comments I have to say they have been really good. Looking at that first entry...[shakes head]...it was terrible...
Star Voter Season 6
|
I balance out my online meanness by being very pleasant in person. :)OH MY GOD I HAVE TO COMMENT ON THIS!
That is so self-aware! Sean, that is the funnies, most true thing I have ever heard!
OK, guys, let me tell you, as gruff as Sean may be online and in posts (and he is), he is without doubt one of the coolest, nicest, most polite and friendly people you will ever meet. He is a great guy and always has a smile on his face and a good word to say to you when he sees you. The crazy dichotomy of his online persona and real life persona are so shockingly different I just have to comment on this. Seriously. This is so true! And posted by Sean himself! Awesome!
Well played, Mr. Reynolds... :)
Clark this implies that we will meet Sean some day! I demand you change this statement to add the clause that we might never meet Sean! :P
Just go to PaizoCon. That's where I last ran into him :) So you can meet Sean (and his wonderful wife) if you want to. Seriously, the difference between his online gruffness and his in person kindness is quite striking. :) And if you go to PaizoCon, you can see it for yourself.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
,
Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka JoelF847
|
You can also meet Sean at Gen Con. He ran my very first PFS game and was an awesome GM - one of the best games I've ever played at a con. His on the spot hand drawn NPC tokens are pretty cool too.
You can also meet Sean at Gen Con. He ran my very first PFS game and was an awesome GM - one of the best games I've ever played at a con. His on the spot hand drawn NPC tokens are pretty cool too.
*blush*
|
|
You guys are great. ;o) It is funny how different Sean is online and in person. I never experienced his online personality before we met. Probably a good thing? Hahah! Just kidding! Naturally, he didn't treat me any different online/in-person. I've heard so many people who meet him in person say how surprised they are at how great he is haha! I'm enjoying Clark's comments haha!
Perhaps I've just not seen enough of him, but am I the only one that's not thought that Sean's harsh online? I mean, I've never really seen that side of him. I probably wouldn't have thought him the epitome of gregariousness, but I'd hardly call him hard. Of course, I've never met him in person, so, it might be a thing of degree...
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So we arent alway mean :) (me anyway, Sean is always mean--wait, just kidding, Sean don't send ninjas after me)I balance out my online meanness by being very pleasant in person. :)
Which makes it particularly frightening when one does something that results in "THE LOOK" from Sean.
Is that a frightful presence or a gaze attack? Or both rolled up into one?
|
Developer
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stunning Glance (Su) As a standard action, Sean Reynolds can stun a creature within 30 feet with a look. The target must succeed on a DC 21 Fortitude save or be stunned for 2d4 rounds. The save DC is Charisma-based.
It's an active ability, so definitely an on-use gaze attack. :)
Funny thing is I don't remember why I gave James THE LOOK that one time. It probably was in response to some snarky comment he made about how much work I wasn't doing. :p
Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
|
Okay, I realize it was back in December, but I kinda want to know something.
SKR mentioned that in most cases items that affect a pregnancy in some way would be a PR nightmare, whether it's beneficial or negative. I was just wondering, then what kind of discussion happened before creating the Attic Whisperer (see: Bestiary 2).
This is in no way meant to be a gotcha question. I'm just wondering if their is an inconsistency here, or a reason behind this. Like you don't want to see things like the Attic Whisperer in RPG Superstars, or their was a lot of discussion before it was included in the book, or what? Either way I'm curious.
EDIT: If it is just an accidental inconsistency I don't care. It happens to all of us. :)
Attic whisperer = evil undead arising from the death of a neglected child.
Pregnancy item = magic item that promotes/advocates adventuring while pregnant or otherwise doing something to a pregnant woman.
The first presents neglecting a child as a bad thing.
The second implies that adventuring while pregnant is a good thing, or that there is some utility in using magic on a pregnant woman.
See the difference?
|
Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
|
I could see that, but playing with a number of female gamers I know that it can be looked at as an interesting opportunity for roleplaying (this is according to them. Well, and myself admittedly) both from the DMs seat and the player's perspective. Especially if it's something where the character's have no choice due to time constraints or the character carrying something along the lines of a godling or prophesied child.
At the same time I can see where you wouldn't necessarily want to promote it as the design company. Just like any of a number of other interesting roleplaying situations that could come up in a game that would have to be handled carefully by the DM and players.
This presents a problem for me, being a female gamer. By skirting the pregnancy issue, you've essentially cut out an important part of a female character's life, if the DM and player decide to go down that road. In a system that seems much more "grown up" than many of the other tabletop RPGs, an issue like this would be something I would expect to see you guys take head on.
I don't see your argument for promoting something by making an item to aid in it. Doesn't this happen when you make evil items? Does this mean you condone the evil doing that may or may not happen, or does it mean you made the items, put them out for public use, and let the DMs and players decide the morality behind it?
If PR is a problem, how is pregnancy more of an issue than, say, the implied rape and masturbation in Book of the Damned Vol. 2, Lords of Chaos, or what Ogres are implied to do? Sure, you're not painting it in a good light, but it's out there for player use. Why is it unacceptable to put pregnancy items out in much the same manner, or rather, put them out in a neutral way and let the players decide, much the same way evil items are handled?
I understand that pregnancy can make people feel a bit uncomfortable, especially in a violent role playing setting, but so can rape and masturbation, especially to a girlgeek. DMs and players can leave these things out of their game if they wish, but the items and concepts are still there and fleshed out for players who wish to include it in their game. I suppose I feel that if Paizo can include such adult topics as dead children, rape and masturbation, pregnancy should be fairly easy.
Thanks :)
Any item that is questionable in terms of content - for good reasons or for arguable ones - isn't superstar. They're looking for the best items, not the best items sometimes.
|
Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
|
I think the conversation has veered away from having specifically to do with RPG Superstar. Obviously you wouldn't want to put something with what is considered questionable content in the competition, just in case it got you disqualified. I think the conversation has more to do with Pathfinder as a whole and it's generally agreed upon maturity level.
This 3.5e disease is pretty funny. I've read some articles on Sex, Romance, and Childbirth in RPGs that were pretty interesting, though I can understand if some people are really uncomfortable with the whole area. Really, that might have something to do with the fact that it puts one in an awkward situation in front of, or even with, the other players sitting around the table. Maybe my cleric should be head over heels in love with that monk, but if that monk is played by my brother... well, Cadderly ain't getting his Danica!
Anyway, how many items push the questionable content boundaries? How many of those generally merit serious consideration? Obviously a special purple pimp hat that grants a bonus to slapping women isn't going anywhere, but does one often see mature items well presented?
Obviously a special purple pimp hat that grants a bonus to slapping women isn't going anywhere, but does one often see mature items well presented?
Lollerskates XD
I have to admit that I haven't seen any mature items even presented in mainstream books. The only "mature" items I've seen presented are in splat books. Mature, as in relating to sexuality.
the pregnancy issue
Superstar has an unofficial rule about vomit, and I think an item aimed at removing morning sickness might invoke that rule.
pregnancy is also an item best left to house rules I dont think most want to read about DC checks for still births and abnormalities that were common in the medieval ages
medieval ages
... but... I thought we were talking about Golarion's present...
(sorry, poor joke, returning to lurking now)
This presents a problem for me, being a female gamer. By skirting the pregnancy issue, you've essentially cut out an important part of a female character's life, if the DM and player decide to go down that road.
The same could be said about rape, poop, and child sacrifice magic items... "important" to certain stories, if the DM and player decide to go down that road.
But they're not gonna happen on my watch.
I don't see your argument for promoting something by making an item to aid in it. Doesn't this happen when you make evil items? Does this mean you condone the evil doing that may or may not happen, or does it mean you made the items, put them out for public use, and let the DMs and players decide the morality behind it?
Have you read RPG Superstar Wondrous Item Advice #14 and the discussion of it?
This is a game of high fantasy. It deals primarily with overcoming foes, solving mysteries and having adventures.
Having a baby is not adventurous (at least not in the way that we are talking about here). Having a device that aids in pregnancy is no more fun than a device that aids in doing ones taxes.
It isn't really the goal of fantasy role-playing to create rules for every aspect of life. Like Sean said, there aren't any in-game rules about pooping.
Come to think of it my characters have NEVER gone to the bathroom.
In your own game feel free to do whatever you want, but don't be surprised that a gaming company isn't interested in publishing a ring of +2 vs cramps.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
,
Star Voter Season 6
|
In your own game feel free to do whatever you want, but don't be surprised that a gaming company isn't interested in publishing a ring of +2 vs cramps.
Wouldn't that be a nuvaring +2?
Edit: usually once a month I audit a call when a young women calls in and asks if we cover IEDs for birth control. I always wanted to say "That's a bit drastic don't you think?"
Matthew, it'd probably take care of the problem permanently, though.
medieval ages... but... I thought we were talking about Golarion's present...
(sorry, poor joke, returning to lurking now)
That would be worse
dm : roll to see if the baby is a vermin with a subtype of altered